Goodbye to an Old Friend

I like to believe that I am fairly adept at keeping up to speed with entertainment news on a daily basis.  I’m not referring to celebrity news (which I’ve been known to dabble in, and I’ll admit, enjoy) but rather to casting news, movie plots, cancellation buzz around tv shows, that kind of thing.  Yet today, I left the house with only 7% battery on my phone and when the battery died, I was left without my finger on the pulse, rendering me completely unaware of the death of one of my personal and professional idols.

It wasn’t until hours later when I got home and plugged my phone in that I saw a text from a good friend saying, “Sorry to hear your idol has passed away.  You’ll have to watch his fav movies in his honour”.  My heart actually started to beat faster as I immediately grabbed my mum’s ipad (literally from her hands) and went to old faithful imdb.com.  At the top of the page and dominating the news stories, I saw that Roger Ebert had passed away from cancer at the age of 70.

For any of you that know me in real life, you know of my desire for my own reality show, “Celebrity Brother Husbands” and how easily I throw around the phrase “Ooh I love _______ (insert actor/actress name here)”.  Yes, it is true, I love a lot of actors, actresses, directors, producers, writers, yet there are few that I would say I respect and admire.  Paul Newman, Robert Redford, Robert De Niro, Audrey Hepburn come to mind, and included in this group is Roger Ebert.

Such was my kinship with Mr. Ebert, albeit completely one-sided, that I received more than one text asking how I was feeling after hearing of his death.  I have always been a lover of cinema but recent years have marked an increased desire to not only watch movies, but to know movies, to understand and study them as well as enjoy them.  This passion was, in part, fueled by the writings of Ebert.  I followed him on Twitter and read his blogs religiously.  In all honesty, I have rarely seen a movie of late without first reading his review.  After watching a film, I would read the review again to see how my views compared and I won’t lie, I was happy when our findings were similar.  I can only imagine how annoying it must have been for my friends when, in trying to substantiate my views about films, I’d throw out a “Well, you know, Ebert said...”.

But it wasn’t just his reviews that were remarkable, his blog on other topics was equally interesting.  I follow many people on twitter, but there are few that I check regularly and Ebert was, of course, one of them. Visiting his feed always led me to other interesting articles, some written by him, others by people he respected.  Such is the power of a skilled tweeter, they act as a conduit to the most incredible things available on the internet.  And Ebert was a fan of the internet, just another thing we had in common.  (Did you know he was one of the first to invest in Google?)

My measly blog of reviews is perhaps a direct result of Mr. Ebert.  It was his work, which was revolutionary in the history of film criticism, that propelled me to start my blog and it is his passing that has ensured I will continue to write.  He changed the way people reviewed cinema.  His knowledge and in depth commentary was a far cry from the old plot summary and star ratings that peppered newspapers of the past.  It is because of him that I try to shy away from plot summaries and really write what I think and feel about the movies that I watch.  Ebert helped me to realise that perhaps a career in writing is what I should pursue, and while I am a long way from being a respected critic, I will certainly try.

Today, Entertainment Weekly wrote:

With Ebert’s passing, the movies have lost one of their greatest champions — a man who never lost his passion for staring at a bigger-than-life screen in the hushed dark of the matinee and who never stopped from sharing that passion with the rest of us.

It was his passion and love of film that I admired most, it made me feel great because I too felt that way.  I admit that I cried this evening when reading his blog from earlier this week Leave of Presence because it marks the end of an era.  It’s true, I can go back and read old reviews and continue to learn from this legend through his books, yet there won’t ever be anything new.  Even when he was ill and had guest reviewers in, I would read what they wrote and always in the back of my mind would be a nagging, “Yeah, but what would Roger think?”

I am sad because while never having any real contact with the man, I still felt a connection.  I admire his resolve and his unwavering commitment to his craft that wouldn’t let cancer get in the way.  I admire how he was a true pioneer in the field that I would love to work in, forever changing the way people watched movies.  While my conversations with Mr. Ebert were always one-sided (and in my head), I feel like I've lost a well-respected, and more importantly, trusted friend.

I am truly heartbroken that he is gone.

So I'm very behind

I have seen the majority of the movies but have fallen behind on my reviews, mainly because I was planning my Oscar party this week!

Anyways, here are my picks:

Best Picture:  Argo - handsdown, one of the best films of the year, and that I've ever seen.
Best Director:  Ang Lee - since Ben Affleck wasn't nominated.  Life of Pi is the most beautiful film ever.  It's actually stunning and I loved it.  It is a wonder in film making and a joy that everyone should watch
Best Actor:  I think Daniel Day-Lewis will take it, but I'm putting my pick as Hugh Jackman, the hardest working man in Hollywood.
Best Supporting Actor:  Christoph Waltz - let's make it two!
Best Actress: Jennifer Lawrence - I really hope she takes it over Jessica Chastain, read my blog about Zero Dark Thirty to see why.  Lawrence is an exceptional actress who makes such interesting choices and appeals to all audience.
Best Supporting Actress: I'm picking Amy Adams just purely out of my dislike of Anne Hathaway - she will probably take it but c'est la vie.  I think Amy Adams gives incredibly strong performances no matter what she does and if Hugh is Hollywood's hardest working man, then Amy Adams is the hardest working woman.

Enjoy the show folks!

Les Miserables

For your consideration...

I must confess, I saw this film on its opening day and was very irresponsible in not reviewing it sooner because I'm struggling now to remember every detail.  However, one thing I'm certain about is that Les Miserables is truly a showcase of Mr. Hugh Jackman, and is hopefully a vehicle for future talents like Eddie Redmayne and Samantha Barks.

Spanning seventeen years and set against the backdrop of political turmoil in Paris (but not the French Revolution of 1789, this is a common misconception), Les Miserables is a true epic film, and a true musical as there is hardly any dialogue that is not sung.  The film follows Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman), an ex-con who has served nineteen years of hard labour for stealing a loaf of bread and who goes on to better himself by becoming the mayor of a town in France.  Once exposed, Valjean agrees to raise Cosette (young: Isabelle Allen, Amanda Seyfried) the illegitimate daughter of Fantine (Anne Hathaway).  As well as the new responsibility of raising a daughter, Valjean must also contend with avoiding capture at the hands of police inspector Javert (Russell Crowe).  Throughout the film the audience is introduced to Thenardier (Sacha Baron Cohen) and Madame Thenardier (Helena Bonham Carter) and their daughter Eponine (young: Natalya Wallace, Samantha Barks) who were Cosette's original caregivers, as well as Marius (Eddie Redmanye) the love interest of both Cosette and Eponine.  The film culminates in the June Rebellion or Paris Uprising of 1832 led by student societies.

I was a fan of the 1998 non-musical version of the film starring Liam Neeson and Geoffrey Rush and I've seen the stage show in London (how posh), so I was a bit skeptical when I heard they were making another version.  Yet this feeling was disregarded when I heard that Hugh Jackman had been cast as Valjean.  I know that Daniel Day Lewis is the favourite for the Oscars tomorrow night, and he is fantastic, but I can't help but say a little prayer for Hugh.  Is this may favourite of his roles?  No, but I feel it would be just desserts for arguably one of the hardest working and most professional actors in Hollywood.  I saw his one man show in Toronto and honestly, the man should give classes on how to survive in Hollywood.  He is a chameleon, equally believable as X-Men's Wolverine as he is playing gay Peter Allen.  I truly believe there is nothing this man can't do.  I can remember my parents went to see The Boy From Oz, the biographical broadway show of Peter Allen's life.  When my dad came home, he could not believe that Hugh Jackman was the same man who'd played Wolverine, such was his transformation.

I am not the biggest Amanda Seyfried fan in the world, I don't dislike her, it's just she's not a huge draw for me.  However, she can sing and I did like her in this movie.  I've heard that Russell Crowe has taken some stick over his performance in Les Miserables because his singing voice is not up to scratch with the rest of the cast.  I will admit he is not the best singer in the world, but somehow, he suits this role and I loved him in it.  I felt like his gravelly voice suited this hardened police inspector, he was just a good fit for the role.  Would he have made it on Broadway?  No, but that's the business of movie making.  

Next up, Anne Hathaway.  If any of you readers know me in real life, you know my sentiments on Hathaway, rather my disdain.  I don't know what it is, I won't deny she is a good actress, but I always get the feeling she is overacting.  She was the annoying kid in your drama class who always insisted on speaking in accents and is now desperately trying to show the world that she's gone from geek to chic.  I haven't always felt this way - I liked The Princess Diaries and I liked The Devil Wears Prada, but I feel she's really trying too hard to show the world she is no longer Princess Mia.  We get it!  You've made the transition!  Now stop annoying me.  

Upon reflection, I think I can pin my distain to two films, One Day and Love and Other Drugs.  I should have loved One Day - it's my kind of story, I loved the book and I love Jim Sturgess.  However, I am also a stickler for accents, and Hathaway's in this movie kills me.  It's not bad, it's just inconsistent.  She constantly changes from a Yorkshire accent to a London one and I've heard this being explained away as her character had been living in London so naturally, her accent would change.  I don't buy this, it is an excuse.  (Quick note on accents re: Les Mis - why, when a film is set in France, does every person have an English accent??).  For Love and Other Drugs, this movie had such promise - a unique storyline that I never would have guessed, and of course, Jake Gyllenhaal, however, Hathaway's portrayal of Maggie grated on me and ruined the film.  I'm not even going to get into The Dark Knight Rises...  I read The Guardian's review of Les Miserables and the reviewer, Alex von Tunzelmann hit the nail on the head.  She said that during Anne Hathaway's rendition of "I Dreamed a Dream" "Hathaway's performance veers between fragile sobbing and Susan Boyle-style operatics. It's so nakedly an Oscar clip that they might as well have flashed up the words "OSCAR CLIP" on the screen, as they do in Wayne's World when Wayne splashes water over his eyes and bawls: "I never learned to read!"  Yes Alex!  You get me!  I'm not going to lie, I enjoyed Les Mis more after *SPOILER ALERT* Fantine dies.

For me, there were three standout performances in this movie, besides the obvious Hugh Jackman.  Eddie Redmayne, Samantha Barks and Sacha Baron Cohen.  I don't know what it is about Redmayne but I adore him.  I recently watched My Week With Marilyn and he's just excellent.  I loved him as Marius, I loved his voice and I hope these two exceptional roles open the door for much more.  I saw this film with my mum, and during one of Redmayne's most touching scenes, my mum leaned over to me and whispered "My God, his mouth his huge", all the better to kiss me with!  Samantha Barks, while supposed to be the perpetual understudy to Seyfried's Cosette is a scene stealer.  She is very familiar with the role of Eponine, having played it on stage and this shows in her performance.  I spent the film hoping things would change and that Marius would choose her.  I also spent much of the film wondering how her waist was so teeny tiny, but that's another story!  Like Redmayne, I wait in anticipation to see what she does next!

I am not a usual fan of Sacha Baron Cohen, I find his Borat et al to be too over the top and really just not my kind of humour.  However, his recent roles in Hugo and now Les Miserables have showed his versatility as well as his humour.  I believe he was exceptional in this movie, and like Barks, was an absolute scene stealer.  In what is a dark premise, he manages to make many scenes lighter and funny.  His performance is complimented by Helena Bonham Carter (no, this is not a Tim Burton film), but he is the funnier of the two.  (I'm uber excited that he's going to be portraying Freddie Mercury in an upcoming project).

I love Tom Hooper's vision in this movie, it is truly breathtaking.  The opening scenes of Valjean in the workers prison are outstanding and they set the tone for the rest of the movie.  He has created a version of Paris that I think reflects France in the 19th century.  The costumes are also exceptional, the colours reflecting the revolutionary feel.  I think the revolution scenes are my favourite and I love when the cast sings "Do You Hear the People Sing?"  I had goosebumps.

I had hoped that this version would have made musicals popular again, but I fear the sheer length of it, a whopping 157 minutes (like most best picture nominees this year) may deter folk.  It will certainly be a favourite amongst fans of the original musical, and it is an awards darling - as any historical film tends to be, and Anne and Hugh may even take home an Oscar, but unfortunately, I feel that unless you already liked musical before watching it, you won't become a fan at the end (even though it's a great movie).  Thankfully, I already love musicals!

Silver Linings Playbook

For your consideration...

F. Scott Fitzgerald (one of my most favourite authors, you know, in case you were wondering) once said, 

“Often people display a curious respect for a man drunk, rather like the respect of simple races for the insane.  There is something awe-inspiring in one who has lost all inhibitions”.  

I believe that is one of the messages of David O. Russell’s Silver Linings Playbook.  Throughout the film the audience wonders if the so called “sane” people are really that sane and that perhaps there is something, like Fitzgerald said, awe-inspiring about the ability to lose one’s inhibitions.

The film begins with Pat (Bradley Cooper), a 30-something substitute teacher who has just been released from an institution into the care of his parents Dolores and Pat Sr. (Jacki Weaver and Robert DeNiro).  The audience learns through Pat’s inability to listen to Stevie Wonder’s “My Cherie Amour” that his wife cheated on him with a history teacher (with tenure).  As a result, Pat seriously attacks his wife’s lover resulting in his institutionalisation.  

Upon his return to the family home, we, along with Pat are reminded of the idiosyncrasies of not only the Solatano clan, but our own families.  We discover that Pat Sr. is a bookmaker obsessed with the Philadelphia Eagles.  Constantly worried about his son’s condition, Pat Sr. overlooks his own quirks (the juju, the remotes...).  When I say the audience is reminded of their own relatives, perhaps I’m generalising, perhaps it was just me.  Would I have connected with Pat Sr. so much if he hadn’t been played by Robert DeNiro, my own Dad’s personal hero, I can’t say for sure. (Just an aside note, I once had a dream that I won an Oscar and DeNiro presented it to me, and in the dream, my Dad didn’t congratulate me, instead he asked - like a love struck teen - what DeNiro was like).  

I can understand the Solatano’s superstitions because my family also has a sporting obsession, one in which, and I’ll reference good ol’ F. Scott, we totally loose our inhibitions when supporting them.  We’ve painted our faces, missed school and work for matches and for many years I would wear the same necklace and pin to every game.  To an outsider, yes, this may seem crazy, but to us, it’s tradition and ceremonial.  For me, the Solatano’s Eagles love is a reminder not to pass judgement too quickly because we’re all capable of a little crazy sometimes.  It also shows the unique bond this family shares and that regardless of fights and misunderstandings, their's is a deep rooted love.

Jacki Weaver is superb as Dolores, the most sympathetic and understanding character in Silver Linings.  She worries rather than judges and somehow manages to keep her family together.  She seems to know her son the best, and unlike other characters, she has faith in him.  She is the orchestrator of his “Silver Lining” by helping to set up his jogging meeting with Tiffany.

Ah yes, Tiffany - played brilliantly by Jennifer Lawrence.  She is a true star, someone parents and kids can both like and she always seems genuine in every role whether it’s fighting to the death a la Hunger Games or fighting just to keep afloat in life as a young widow in Silver Linings.  This is indeed a different role for Ms. Lawrence, we are used to seeing her as strong (X-Men, Hunger Games) but not usually so hard as in this film.  She is also vulnerable and sad, and most importantly misunderstood, leading her family, and Pat Sr. (and even Pat Jr. on occasion) to define her as crazy.  Yet grief affects everyone differently and while morally, we may not agree with how she’s handle her grief, the point is just that, it is her grief and we as an audience, or Pat as her friend don’t necessarily need to understand, we need to support (a major theme of the film).

Chris Tucker as Danny, Pat’s friend from the hospital, John Ortiz and Julia Stiles as Ronnie and Veronica as Pat’s friend and his wife and Anupam Kher as Dr. Patel round up this incredible cast.  Tucker adds comedy and dance skills to the film as he goes on his own journey of acceptance so he can shed the crazy label.  Veronica and Ronnie are interesting as their main plot purpose is to highlight the fact that despite the pretense of a happy family, Ronnie feels like he’s suffocating and can’t tell his wife.  They like to pass judgement on Pat and Tiffany for not being normal but what they fail to realise is that Pat and Tiffany don’t need to be normal or “sane” because as the movie progresses, propelled by emotion and not expectation, they become increasingly free and less likely to feel suffocated. Dr. Patel also adds comedic effect and is a shining example of things not always being what they seem.  During the week he’s a mild mannered therapist, but come Sunday (like my family), he’s not afraid to throw some paint on his face to support his team.  Again, some may say this is “crazy” but I think it’s letting go of expectations.

Despite his predicament, Pat manages to remain optimistic and resolute with a personal motto of “Excelsior!”.  This motivation is initially to get back with his wife thus proving that he is healed, shedding the crazy label.  Yet as the film moves forward, Pat instead begins to shed his inhibitions as well as the expectations of others.  This manifests itself in many ways - I personally love that he runs with a garbage bag on.  Yes, he is running to get in shape for his wife, but the fact that he doesn’t care what he’s wearing is liberating.  If I ever jogged, after seeing this film, I’d be tempted to throw on a garbage bag to do it.

Pat and Tiffany embark on an emotional journey, initially not realising they are doing it together.  I love that they enter a dance competition with no hopes of winning, simply because she loves to dance.  To be that passionate about something is an incredible feeling, and like Pat with the garbage bag, it doesn’t matter what people think or if they win, the fact is they’re doing something, they are living.  I was a bit skeptical of this pairing when I first heard about it, perhaps because I picture Bradley Cooper in The Hangover and Jennifer Lawrence in The Hunger Games but the chemistry is undeniable.  Cooper shows some serious acting chops which no doubt made his old dean James Lipton proud.

In fact the chemistry between the whole cast is remarkable.  Each character, in their struggle to appear sane inadvertently showcases their little "crazies", putting the audience at ease because we too have our own.  And if there’s one thing this movie shows without a shadow of a doubt is that that’s ok.  In her SAG acceptance speech (which is hopefully a precursor for the Oscars), Lawrence said that David O. Russell made a film for his son, so that he wouldn’t feel alone and so that he would be understood, and that Russell actually ended up making a film for so many who suffer from mental illness.

Yes Silver Linings Playbook wraps up neatly with the help of a football game and a dance contest, and no, that is not real life.  However, the film tackles real life issues, and tackles them well.  It highlights the fear people have about mental illness and more importantly, their fear of talking about it, but it is something that, especially nowadays, needs to be discussed.  I think my favourite thing about this film wasn’t the incredible cast, the witty writing or the emotional journey but rather the fact that it really made me think about how exhilarating it would be to run down my street wearing a garbage bag, throwing caution and more importantly, people’s opinion to the wind...call me crazy, I’m ok with it.

Zero Dark Thirty

For your consideration...

It’s always difficult to create suspense when the audience knows the outcome of a story.  Some films (ARGO) tackle this problem with success, others, in my opinion, not so much.  This is the case with Zero Dark Thirty.  I went into the theatre on opening day with high hopes.  The trailers looked good, the cast - stellar, the subject matter - interesting, yet what I saw on the screen fell short.  

I think my main issue about this film comes from the marketing and the hype surrounding it.  I’ve watched the trailers again (a few times actually) and I don’t feel the film delivered.  It’s like watching a trailer for a comedy that literally puts the only funny parts in the whole movie into that minute and a half.  The most suspenseful part of Zero Dark Thirty is the music from the trailer.  This film should not have been marketed as a thriller, rather, it should have been made as a documentary because it elicited no emotion from me.  They didn’t need actors or a plot (which was almost non-existent anyway).  Perhaps using Jessica Chastain as a no nonsense, determined strong female lead was an attempt to make this larger than life story that we all know more accessible, more human, but again, it fails.  The only characters who manage to pull off some response from me were the ones who played the Navy Seals, but their presence was far too late in this far too long movie to have the desired effect.

I’m not faulting the cast.  In fact, I’m a huge fan of many of them.  I would have loved to see Jessica Chastain win the Academy Award last year and I’ve had to refrain from attacking people who didn’t like Friday Night Lights such is my love of Kyle Chandler.  I just don’t think they were given much to do in this picture.  My only hope is that the cast can reunite in the future to make a film worthy of them.  

I won’t fault Kathryn Bigelow’s directing too much because I suppose she did it well.  The scenes in which the take down of bin Laden occurs, while overly long, were how I imagined they played out in real life.  She’s managed to present something to the audience that we would never be privy to in our every day lives.  She does this with the interrogation scenes at the beginning of the film, but again, they were too long.  I know there is much controversy about these torture scenes but really America, no, World, how do you think these things happen?  Do you think that suicide bombers who by their very existence live to die for their cause just rattle off information when asked?  Whether you agree with torture or not isn’t the point.  I don’t think Bigelow is glorifying anything, I just think she’s showing what she learned from her extensive research.  

I also take issue with the limited release of the film which allowed it to qualify for the Academy Awards this year.  I wonder if it had come out only on it’s actual release date of last Friday would it have garnered as many awards?  It certainly would have caused a controversy as any film with similar content would, but would we still be talking about a year later?  I wonder.

Essentially I felt that the movie was a whole lot of waiting.  Perhaps this would have been ok if I watched Zero Dark Thirty in say twenty years, when I hadn’t been alive during the hunt for Osama bin Laden, but the fact of the matter is, I was alive for the decade that the hunt took place, and I felt like I was forced to sit for a decade in that theatre.  I didn’t think it possible for me to want Osama bin Laden caught any faster than I did in real life, but watching Zero Dark Thirty, I wanted him caught sooner if only to end the movie.

Here we, or rather I, go again...

I utterly failed at blogging last year, that is a fact.  However, with the new year only 15 days young, and with the Golden Globes over and the Academy Awards fast approaching, I've decided to give it the old college try...again.  It is my attempt to watch what's been nominated regarding the major categories: Best Picture, Director, Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor, Actress and Screenplay.  I'll post my reviews as I see the films, wait, already I'm lying to you as I've seen three Best Picture nominees and I've only got one review done.  So, I'll post as I write the reviews.  Upon (hopeful) completion I'll then be able to really, wholeheartedly, predict who will win, and then who I think should win.

As always, a disclaimer is needed.  I'm not saying I'm the next Roger Ebert (contrary to a snarky comment I heard the other day), I'm simply writing my opinion from a film lover's perspective.  If I write something you don't like or agree with, please tell me.  Oftentimes if I don't like a film I wrack my brain trying to see if it's something I've missed - so who knows, you may be able to change my mind and then I'll have to write an addendum.

This is very much the case for my first review which I'm almost hesitant to post as my dislike was strong for such a critically acclaimed film.   However, like the fearless Ebert, I must be true to my opinions.

Happy New Year and Happy Reading!

Are the kids all right? They most certainly are...

Laser:  Why did you donate your sperm?
Paul:  Because it seemed more fun than donating blood.


The Kids are All Right is the story of a lesbian couple who conceived children using a sperm donor and the subsequent reactions and interactions that ensue when the kids decide they want to meet their "father".  The film was directed by Lisa Cholodenko and was written by Cholodenko and Stuart Blumberg.  A stellar cast including Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo and of course the kids Mia Wasikowska (that's a mouthful) and Josh Hutcherson rounds off an interesting plot worthy of an Oscar nod.  Should it have won?  We'll see.


What I liked about this movie is that it wasn't a film about lesbians - it was a movie about a family undergoing a massive change in their home dynamics.  It doesn't matter that Jules and Nic are lesbians, the idea that the kids wanted to meet their donor could happen to any family.  


While Brokeback Mountain was groundbreaking for portraying the struggle of a gay couple, The Kids are All Right is equally groundbreaking for portraying the struggles of a married couple - gay or straight doesn't really matter - every couple has the potential to face infidelity, and every family certainly has issues with teenage kids.  The story is about the family, Nic and Jules being gay is like an aside note, like Nic being a doctor or Jules being a landscaper and it is hopefully a sign of things to come in cinema where the plot of this film is no longer considered "tricky subject matter" (not my words) but just a great and heartwarming story.


I have yet to fault Annette Bening's acting and this movie is no exception (I think it may have a little bit to do with the fact that she is Mrs. Warren Beatty).  Her performance is so real and at times, it's actually painful to watch what she is going through.  Always having to be the sensible one, the breadwinner, the stricter parent, and to see her role in the family threatened by the arrival of Paul (especially when she learns of the affair) is heartbreaking. 


I'm also a fan of Julianne Moore and her performance is great - but I will admit that sometimes the character grated on my nerves.  I wanted to yell "Grow up!!" at several points in the film.  The character of Jules was at times a bit too cliche for my liking - this is perhaps best summed up in naming Josh Hutcherson's character Laser.  That just annoyed me and I didn't find it believable.  (I didn't think that Nic would have allowed it).  In saying that, I think Moore did a great job in showcasing Jules' frustration in life - and because I always become too engrossed in characters lives - I was happy that she was good at landscaping because it gave her a sense of worth that was grossly missing.


Mark Ruffalo - there are not enough words to explain my love for this man and his acting.  Versatility thy name is Ruffalo.  Much like Ryan Gosling's Dean in Blue Valentine, Mark Ruffalo's portrayal of Paul annoys me at times, but I think it proves what great actors both of these men are because I never thought annoyance was possible with them.  At times, I loved Paul and I wanted him to be part of the kids' lives, at other times, like with Jules I wanted to say grow up.  It was nothing to do with the acting, more the way the character is written.  Again, almost a too cliched Bohemian.  (It could be that Paul was just too cool for school and I was a little jealous - I'm undecided).  I feel bad for him too, because he bears the blame for the affair and when forgiveness is going around, he doesn't get any - and while I hate that he portrayed a cliche I'm going to use one here - it takes two to tango and Jules was a willing participant.  It was unfair that he was ousted from Joni and Laser's lives when Jules got to move back in.


I saw Alice in Wonderland in 3D - it was ok.  It wasn't my favourite movie and I'll admit, I didn't leave a fan of Mia Wasikowska.  To me, that wasn't her breakout role - The Kids are All Right was.  It showcased her range and ability more than Alice did and now, I honestly can't wait to see what she does next.  I like that she chose this after such a big production, and I think with this movie she has written her own ticket to choose what she wants to do.  Joni had the potential to be flat and boring, with Laser being the star of the show but Wasikowska brought a depth to the character that combined a strength and vulnerability that translated onto the screen.  She had 50 million things to juggle - should she agree to Laser's wish to find their donor?  How to fit Paul into her life, how to exclude Paul from her life when she learns of the affair, the affair in general, going off to college and the list goes on.  Wasikowska provides some great work here, but I think the best is yet to come.


What can be said about Josh Hutcherson except that he had me bawling in Bridge to Terabithia and he impressed me beyond belief in this movie.  Like Wasikowska, I expect great things from this young 18 year old.  I loved the way he portrayed the struggle faced with letting Paul in.  The initial excitement at meeting him, and the disappointment when Paul didn't turn out to be what he expected.  I think it's interesting to note that while Laser is Jules' kid, like NicNic's daughter eats up Paul's lifestyle.  Food for thought.  Apart from his name, I can't fault Josh Hutcherson in any way.


I really enjoyed this film and have recommended it to as many people as possible.  I can without a shadow of a doubt confirm that yes, I believe an Oscar nod was deserved (as were the ones that Ruffalo and Bening received) but I will hold out judgement on whether it should have won until after I've reviewed all of the nominees.  If you want to see a film that deals with the delicate intricacies that make up family dynamics, this is one to watch - as are the careers of Wasikowska and Hutcherson.